Scalia was known to be strictly for interpreting the Constitution as it was originally intended. But we have seen that he ignored that rule with bad consequences. Scalia and Supreme Court crew appointed Bush as president. He had no authority under the Constitution to do this and the Constitution has strict rules for making a new president.
Scalia has said about this disparity, “We did the right thing and that is all we will say.” He surely hasn’t said how he and other justices were acting under the Constitution. George W Bush was not legally elected. Still conservatives say that Scalia was a wonderful example of strict observance of the Constitution. Wrong.
And now conservatives are worried about replacing Scalia. Will they follow the Constitution? They are talking about some hazy rule about how around 80 years the Constitution hasn’t been followed, so they don’t have to follow it and let Obama nominate a replacement as the Constitution says. Again, hypocrisy. Talk about strict observance, and the next sentence they do the opposite.
As Bernie says, we have to start pushing hard to get Republicans in Congress to follow the Constitution.
We also have to work to see that Bernie’s Congress, that will be elected with him, will be more willing to follow the Constitution.
Peter Grant
Bristol